Straight in approach

[FlyingMonkey]

MrMorden, my flying experience in the scenario you set up was you were on a left downwind making calls, etc when the twin calls out he's on 7 mile final straight in runway 7. Just extent your downwind and make that call. Your # 2 behind the twin. Very common at my non towered airport, alternate for Jackson Hole. With all the big fast iron, they too will respect you as a piston. Obviously if your in the pattern the weather conditions are VFR. Their is a mutual respect. Don't be too wimpy on the radio, my most of all be safe you are PIC. You my want to try, no I recommend you do a dozen "short approaches" also. These are done from a down wind entry once abeam the numbers you chop power "slowly" and bank for the runway simulating an engine out. Great maneuver to learn and fun too!

 

That's what I did, extended and landed #2.

[Mike]

just wait for them to call final then you call short final then watch them sweat :>)

[FastEddieB]

Summary...

 

On any given approach and landing at a non-towered airport it probably matters very little whether you overfly the airport first and fly a full pattern.

 

But my feeling is that it is marginally safer to do so, for the reasons I have given. Over an entire flying career, or applied to all pilots, it's a habit that I think just might prevent an accident once in a great while.

 

Meanwhile, others feel that coming straight in or flying other than a standard pattern add no additional risk, or that the risk is so minimal that one can safely ignore it.

 

And never the twain shall meet.

[Jim Meade]

If you look at 91.113 it is not clear if lower trumps slower. When is a plane on final? Just because you are straight in doesn't put you on final at 5 miles out, does it?

When flying IFR, the Final Approach Fix is typically 5 miles off the approach end of the runway. Without further support, my call would be that if I was 5 miles out, more or less on line with the runway, that I'm on final. (The faster the plane, the more "on final" I am).

 

" When two or more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way, but it shall not take advantage of this rule to cut in front of another which is on final approach to land or to overtake that aircraft."

 

Based on the above, it would be my guess that a Twin Cessna at 1200 AGL on four mile final has right of way over a CTSW at 1000 AGL on downwind. The Twin Cessna is flying blue line (all assymetrical thrust twins will fly blue line), which if I remember right is 120 kias for the Twin Cessna, and will all the way to where the runway is made. The CTSW is probably slowing to 80 kias. Now, where is downwind? Some call downwind at the 45° point where they enter, some call it two miles out when they're more or less lined up on downwind and if the frequency if full of chatter you may not call downwind till you're abeam the numbers and so forth. The Twin Cessna may not know where on downwind you are. Let's assume the CTSW is 1/2 mile off the runway and will turn base when about 1 mile past the end of the runway. The CTSW slows when past the number to about 65 or so. It will take the CTSW about 1 to 1.5 minutes to turn base at 800'. At this time the Twin Cessna is on two mile final, still doing 120 kias and now at about 600'. At 60 kias the CTSW will turn 1 mile final at 500' in about 1 minute. The TC will be at the same place, probably at 300'.

 

I'd say the TC has right of way in that case. Of course, it depends on the size pattern the CTSW flies.

 

As a rule of thumb, very light jets will come in from 95-105 kias (depends on vref). Twins will come in probably 110 kias and more (depends on blue line). Larger singles like a Cherokee 6 will come in at 90 kias. Having some idea of how fast the other plane is likely to be traveling on final doesn't hurt.

[FlyingMonkey]

It clearly has a lot to do with the airplanes involved, as Jim says. A Taylorcraft on a five mile straight in is not really on final; a King Air in the same spot certainly is. In the case I cited the airplane was a Dutchess at 3 miles, so it most definitely was on final, so extending to make room was the right thing. As soon as the Dutchess passed me I started turning my base, knowing he was moving a lot faster than me and would probably be clear of the runway when I was on short final, which is exactly what happened.

 

One other thing about extending the downwind in the CT or similar airplane, is that you fly such tight patterns you are pretty close to the runway...if I was extending for an airplane and couldn't spot them coming in, I might get nervous and want to do something to increase separation, like maybe climbing up and out of the pattern off the downwind or doing a 360° to the right to increase lateral distance from the airplane coming toward me. Thoughts?

[Roger Lee]

There are the rules which help us fit in to an airport's traffic (like driving on the roads), but a little courtesy and common sense can go a long way. For me a lot would have to do with a busy pattern (follow the established pattern and group in the pattern) or a no one else in the pattern at all (you could do what you wanted) and every thing in between. For me I tend to give large close fast movers the right of way. A 3 mile final for a fast mover happens quick.

[paul m]

Standard patterns with exceptions for airport specific reasons (such as Ed described above where you can't see the runway at points) makes sense to me. I rent a CT at a grass strip where often the traffic is piper cubs with no radios. Thinking you're the only guy in the pattern though is never a reason for me to fly it any way I feel like it.

[S3flyer]

This debate has been going on since Orville and Wilbur built their second airplane :-)

 

I agree with Eddie and do the below 95% of the time.

 

On any given approach and landing at a non-towered airport it probably matters very little whether you overfly the airport first and fly a full pattern.

 

But my feeling is that it is marginally safer to do so, for the reasons I have given. Over an entire flying career, or applied to all pilots, it's a habit that I think just might prevent an accident once in a great while.

[Jim]

One point I'd like to make is to never overfly an airport until you're certain there's no skydiving in progress. Everything else is advisory, Avoiding areas marked for skydiving is law.

[Doug G.]

Marked how? On the sectional?

[Doug G.]

I agree with the courtesy but, but I think it applies across the board. I recently heard a FSDO rep talk about a very active (oil field area) airport in ND. A biz jet flier was complaining about other traffic not making way for him on a long straight in. The FSDO reps response was that the other planes were in the pattern at a lower altitude (there is a reason the turbine traffic pattern at many airports is higher than prop traffic) and the lower slower traffic had the right of way. Then the guy complained about how much fuel it took to land using the traffic pattern. I suspect that at this airport you could easily be fourth or fifth in the pattern at times and this guy expects everyone to scatter because he doesn't want to use more fuel.

It is a non-towered airport that is overburdened because of the huge oiil boom out there.

[mocfly]

My 2cents.

 

Much like Fast Eddie I was taught to overfly an unfamiliar airport that did not have an active AWOS. Then enter the pattern dictated by the windsock, tetrahedron(they still have them) or runway indicator. Not to say that I have never run straight in to an airport during the day.

I do make it a habit at night when flying to an unfamiliar airport to fly to the IAF of the published approach and then, if no other traffic is on the CTAF, fly straight in.

 

As standard procedure I always start my calls when I am 10 miles out stating position and intentions. I update this call every 2-3 miles.

 

Now that Foreflight has updated its software to overlay the approach plates on the vfr chart it makes the need for switching back and forth between charts and plates a thing of the past.

 

 

 

[Jim Meade]

A biz jet flier was complaining about other traffic not making way for him on a long straight in. The FSDO reps response was that the other planes were in the pattern at a lower altitude (there is a reason the turbine traffic pattern at many airports is higher than prop traffic) and the lower slower traffic had the right of way. Then the guy complained about how much fuel it took to land using the traffic pattern. I suspect that at this airport you could easily be fourth or fifth in the pattern at times and this guy expects everyone to scatter because he doesn't want to use more fuel.

I've been in the jet's shoes. Since one flies faster, one uses a bigger pattern. Entering the pattern almost assures you that the light planes will turn inside you and legally take your spot, forcing you out into a long downwind for another try to see if someone will let you in.

 

When I was flying charter 5 years ago, we figured $40 per 0.1 hour for the light jets. I'd be willing to bet that is $50 now. It will take at least 2 tenths for a jet to break off an approach, fly an upwind and on around the pattern, maybe 3 tenths. The piston guy could do a little s turning or a 360 and let the jet in at the cost of probably 50 cents worth of fuel. It would not hurt the jet pilot to buy the donuts for the FBO once in a while and invite the piston guys to join in. No doubt, if the jet guys get pushy the piston boys will push back. It doesn't have to be that way.

[Doug G.]

I think some of this may be somewhat unique. The town has gone from 15k to 30k in population in three years and is expected to reach 44k by 2014. They have an airport that was built for a population of 10k with no tower.

In this case it would be shoving a number of other planes out of the pattern.

[FastEddieB]

Jim,

 

1) $50 per 0.1 hrs = $500/hr. I think even the lightest of the light jets costs substantially more than that to operate. http://www.jet-alliance.com/eclipse_hourly_usage_fees.htm

 

2) I understand that a jet needs to fly a wider pattern. But 0.2 or even 0.3 hours is 12 or even 18 minutes. I can't imagine it takes that long to fly a jet pattern.

 

But I've never flown a jet, so if it really takes that long, I'll yield to your experience.

[Jim Meade]

I'm only talking about the extra jet fuel, not the entire expense. I figured the jet is on four mile final and someone won't yield so they have to slide right and fly the upwind leg followed by the regular pattern. The sad thing is, if they fly the regular pattern a piston can still legally slide in and may cause the jet to abort again.

I'm thinking it will take more than one tenth but will agree that three may be on the high side.

[Jim]

Marked how? On the sectional?

 

Little parachute on the sectional. Note in A/FD.

[Doug G.]

Jim, is it illegal to fly over any airport marked on the sectional with a parachute? Local ATC routinely sends me over one of those airports. I think you meant to say it is illegal to fly over them when jump operations are ongoing, not just because they are marked on the sectional? Can you give the FAR for this?

[Jim]

Jim, is it illegal to fly over any airport marked on the sectional with a parachute? Local ATC routinely sends me over one of those airports. I think you meant to say it is illegal to fly over them when jump operations are ongoing, not just because they are marked on the sectional? Can you give the FAR for this?

 

That is what I meant to say.

[opticsguy]

I was on base at KIGQ and a jet flew a final right in front of me and landed. I had to go around.

(deleted for language)

[Duane Jefts]

I was on base at KIGQ and a jet flew a final right in front of me and landed. I had to go around. Prick.

 

Probably lucky you were not on short final. He may not have even seen you.

[FastEddieB]

Found this via Google:

 

http://flighttraining.aopa.org/magazine/2003/August/200308_Departments_Accident_Analysis.html

 

Seemed relevant at first glance.

 

Will comment after reading.